-
05-21-2015, 04:41 PM #101destinytot Guest
Originally Posted by Tag101
Thats me.
-
05-21-2015 04:41 PM
-
That's it, really. Originally Posted by pingu
-
Yes, I found the same thing and mention it in my video above, which is probably not a good example;-) Originally Posted by vhollund
EDIT: modal vibe momentum has got to be the name of your next album, vhollandLast edited by christianm77; 05-21-2015 at 04:57 PM.
-
The 3rd bag comes from altering the IV. (or the ii, or viim7b5 or the V7) Originally Posted by princeplanet
Did you -even- watch my video (*mock outrage*)
I think it works far better than it should at describing the changes. ATTYA is actually pretty amenable to this approach.
A far tougher tune would be Out of Nowhere, or Just Friends.
-
For my part I was missing an actual classic stellar performance by one of the legends of jazz, to show the concept in action
I was too distracted today when I tried to see your video, have to try have a look again maybe sunday
At the moment I listen a lot of Dexter Gordon who is an extremely sophisticated player
I can't seem to find that simplification in his playing though
Target notes for sure and transposed ideas, which I do find much more efficient to create a melodic continuity
Often It's the small and alterations / voice leadings in the thematic developpement (to V7alts) that really makes it work well
I might be going of on a sidetrack, but if we consider the main theme and the invented thematic ideas as the consonance (T) that we recognize through repetition/transposition and developpement, then in an extreme we don't need a key tonality (cf. Schoenberg)
Just some food for thought
Back to when trying the Db lydian /modal thing, I notice that notes I gravitate towards are those of Fm(9) and Db but most important, revolving around the half steps of Ab major (c db g ab)
It did sound kind of modal to insist mostly on those notes with small variationsLast edited by vhollund; 05-21-2015 at 08:34 PM.
-
My internet has gone bad last coupla days- can't watch videos at all. But definitely will come back to it. Altering the IV sounds interesting... Originally Posted by christianm77
-
[QUOTE=vhollund;532884]
For my part I was missing an actual classic stellar performance by one of the legends of jazz, to show the concept in action
Here you go.
I love D Gordon as well! Love that laid back feel. He plays about as far behind the beat as is possible. I have transcribed quite a bit from him, and it has fallen nicely within the framework of the above. Its actually how I figured out where some of it was coming from, along with some Stan Getz lines I always loved. There are many ways to look at the same thing, so it could be just what you and I are use to.I was too distracted today when I tried to see your video, have to try have a look again maybe sunday
At the moment I listen a lot of Dexter Gordon who is an extremely sophisticated player
I can't seem to find that simplification in his playing though
Target notes for sure and transposed ideas, which I do find much more efficient to create a melodic continuity
Often It's the small and alterations / voice leadings in the thematic developpement (to V7alts) that really makes it work well
I might be going of on a sidetrack, but if we consider the main theme and the invented thematic ideas as the consonance (T) that we recognize through repetition/transposition and developpement, then in an extreme we don't need a key tonality (cf. Schoenberg)
Just some food for thought
Back to when trying the Db lydian /modal thing, I notice that notes I gravitate towards are those of Fm(9) and Db but most important, revolving around the half steps of Ab major (c db g ab)
It did sound kind of modal to insist mostly on those notes with small variationsLast edited by Tag101; 05-21-2015 at 10:08 PM.
-
It is definitely a possibility
And a good part of my motivation for being here is also to be confronted with, and try to grasp different perspectives
Dexter is a genius of a player for sure. Everything get so expanded by the way he plays, but still in a very rootsy way
The first jazz solo i ever transcribed back in the 90's was of Dexter Gordon
He lived for a long time not far from where I lived in Copenhagen as a kid, played with NHOP and Alex Riel, at Jazz
House Montmartre, but unfortunately I never got to see him live.
When you chose Fm in ATTYA is there a reason you didn't chose Ab instead ?One of his major influences was Lester Young. Gordon, in turn, was an early influence on John Coltrane during the 1940s and 1950s. Coltrane's playing, however, during his early period from the mid- to late '50s or early '60s influenced Gordon's playing from then onward.Last edited by vhollund; 05-21-2015 at 10:30 PM.
-
No reason for choosing f minor other than it was the first thing that popped into my head! Lots of choices to choose from........ Love dexter for the same reasons you do. No matter what he plays, it always has that Blues roots underneath. Just like benson, Wes, miles, Coltrane, cannonball, Parker, and all of my favorites. 😀
-
Well, thanks to the OP for this, it's very interesting. On Autumn Leaves I played this:
A-7 / F# half dim / E min / D7 / A-7 / B7 / B-7 / E min.
A mix of the originals and subs. A cool sound, a little outside but still you could hear the contour of the song. Although there's a lot of info out there about subs, I've never seen it put so neatly as this.
-
How would we know if they were using it? Originally Posted by vhollund
For my part I was missing an actual classic stellar performance by one of the legends of jazz, to show the concept in action
-
No way to be sure, but if you did enough analysis with any solo you could at least see if it's "chord chasing" or not.... things like guide tones for the ii, ii, IV, vi and vii chords. You can usually tell if players are treating the ii as V..... Originally Posted by christianm77
I don't have time for the moment, but would be pretty cool to go through the Benson ATTYA solo to see what's going on...
-
LTD is a fave of mine also. Love his blues and modal playing especially. Originally Posted by Tag101
-
I don't think it would show up definitively. None of the best soloists are 'chord chasing' - or at least not the ones I have transcribed. Originally Posted by princeplanet
That said I did kind of formulate my I/IV thing by looking at Charlie Parker and Lester Young stuff. But then someone else would look at the same notes and see something else, perhaps. A theory becomes like a lens - you tend to see things that way.
+1 on the Benson ATTYA solo. At least we know he is kind of thinking that way, although the result is obviously just brilliantly musical descriptive lines, so .... *shrugs*
It seems likely that GB is not doing any thinking when he plays. So really, the T/D thing is ultimately just a teaching tool, something to help get you to the point where you just hear and play music.
Oh and +1 on the greatness of Dexter;-)Last edited by christianm77; 05-22-2015 at 04:22 AM.
-
That's a really interesting comment, I'm trying to think of a way to respond that's intelligible ;-) Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Yes playing the chord tones of the original progression is simpler from the perspective of thinking. If someone gives me a bunch of seemingly random chords to solo on in an original tune (you know the sort of thing) this would certainly be my first step!
It's also guaranteed to work 100% of the time. Although Wayne Krantz points out Brecker played this sort of thing entirely by ear, so I suppose that's even simpler and reliable, once you know how.
The T/D simplifies the problem of applying language through conventional harmonic chord progressions by using a bit of analysis up front, so it's a trade off. You can use stuff you know from one context in different contexts. I don't think it would work very well on more contemporary style harmony.
If you learn arpeggios/chord voicings etc for a brand new chord progression you need to learn your chords and arpeggios (eventually in every position.) That's far from simple actually. You will really learn your instrument by doing it....
If you grind through enough tunes doing this (as most of us have done I expect :-)) and learning about chord substitutes you will start to see patterns.
I suppose the T/D thing's simplicity comes from the realisation that a lot of those patterns do the same thing and therefore are essentially interchangeable. I'm not sure if that's something that is understandable or useful unless someone has spent a while doing the conventional chord tone practice thing.
Obviously you also need some language to play to make any music at all. By transcribing on one hand and working on enclosures, scales and patterns etc at the same time, you start to build up a picture of how language works, so that you can intelligently look at lines and get something out of them beyond 'oh that's a nice line' and quoting it verbatim. (Not every school of jazz education holds to this type of analysis, but most seem to involve some sort of pattern or scale drill.)
T/D doesn't help with that per se. It only shows how you can apply language and develop a sense of wholeness in your improvisation, by moving you away from 'bitty' thinking - i.e. 'here is a minor ii-V-I line' and towards a more generalised approach - 'here is a line that resolves to the tonic.'
In the case of Brecker's 'just play by ear' thing, you have to spend a few thousand hours learning how to hear lines on a chord progression and then play them flawlessly on your instrument. That's far from simple.
In fact, reading between the lines from Brecker's own words on the subject, I suspect it's actually something he arrived after years at by practicing more intellectually, before taking 'the plunge' and just playing music (remember the famous Parker quote?)
So that's the simplest and most reliable solution long term. It's also something I think the T/D system naturally points towards.
Anyway, lots of questions. When do you teach T/D. Day one? Or later?Last edited by christianm77; 05-22-2015 at 04:48 AM.
-
Could someone define "chord chasing"?
Thanks
-
M Brecker is great for sure
I read an interview where he said that often he would pratice a new thing intensely, and then move on and forget about it, to suddenly have it pop up in his impro a month later
He took a lot of chances on playing by ear, which i think he got good at back when playing with the brecker bros.Last edited by vhollund; 05-22-2015 at 05:33 AM.
-
I'm going to hazard contributing some reflections to this discussion. Hazard because this post might be a bit of a break in the continuity of analysis that is happening over the past couple of pages. But the title of the thread is George Benson's approach to playing.
Let me say first that I have only seen George Benson once - February 27, 1973 at the Jazz Workshop in Boston, MA. It was an unforgettable night, as I was seated at a front table virtually five to six feet away from George who was playing with his quartet if I recall and with special guest a young Earl Klugh who sat in of a couple of tunes. The evening was recorded and certain tracks are available online. A fabulous evening especially given the intimacy of the club and my vantage point. This was before George broke internationally as a pop musician, and the evening was predominantly jazz guitar at the highest level with a couple of vocal excursions as well. Unforgettable and cool as hell. I was in my senior year in college and definitely into his jazz playing. I have to add that throughout the night the smile almost never left his face and he made it all seem so easy and flowing.
Tonight I was watching a series of YouTube videos drawn from his The Art of Jazz Guitar video broken down into seven segments. So I wanted to comment on that video, which I think is quite interesting in terms of his comments about his approach to playing. First, he starts on a nylon string 'classical' guitar with a cutaway playing a solo version of Polka Dots and Moonbeams in the key of D. What struck me immediately is that his solo chord melody approach was very much rooted in the chords of the song and the transitions from one to another. Another point was that he was playing this tune with his thumb alla Wes Montgomery and certainly was not picking all the notes individually but was using slurs, pull offs and hammer on type articulation to realize the song. As I was playing along, I was using my thumb but also a classical right hand approach with ami type picking that worked just as well imo. Nicely done.
The subsequent elements of the video which is too long to summarize were essentially his reflections on his influences and his approach to the instrument. I've read many comments suggesting that George is not an articulate teacher of his method, yet I find that not to be the case. He clearly knows musical theory, but like a lot of fine jazz players, George's style seems rooted in the blues. I think his melody improvisations are grounded in chord tone centers and their relationship to the tonic. Not once did he speak of modes, CST, or anything analytical in that sense. He emphasized the importance of singing and playing what he hears, noting that he never thinks analytically when he is playing, nor does he look at his hands or anything, because that distracts him from his primary focus which is to play what he hears and to go for it. This is exemplified in his scatting ability, and as George notes, after a while you don't have to "think about" what you are playing - you just play what you intend to shoot for. He emphasizes that voice - mind - fingers connection that I also believe is fundamental to achieve.
In the entire video George articulately and playfully addresses various issues like making chord progressions more interesting, his approach to octave playing, playing blues turnarounds and other things. He does play on his electric guitar but acoustically. If one is looking for dense jazz theory analysis and CST type obscurantism, George is not your man. But I think he is communicating his thinking at a more visceral level because that is how he hears jazz and plays jazz guitar. That does not diminish his teaching but rather demands an elevated level of the viewer and an integration of theory and practice that is beyond the academics. Given that George Benson is clearly in the pantheon of great jazz artists who bridges the gap to popular appeal as well, I think his approach is worth considering. But I think the main thing to understand from this video is that while Benson understands jazz theory, his competence and creative impulse comes from a more fundamental or elemental fusion of practice and theory. He transcends it in his spontaneous approach to music. And that is worth paying attention to.
-
I don't know Originally Posted by christianm77
Even when i watch your video (just did) it's hard for me to see what you are doing conceptually that makes the difference, though it does work
In my mind you are playing some basic subs invertions, but i have a hard time grasping what essentially makes for it a different and advantaged perspective from thinking 6251 and knowing the hybrids and a bunch of voicings variations and subs
Maybe I'm already doing it, or maybe i don't get it
I dono
What is the Barry Harris Scale again ?
It just sounded like Ab major scale with a few alterations to my ears, but it did fit the chords well
When i look at a jazz song i look for 6251s because and can treat the chords ii as IV IV as l/4 etc and have variations based on that
If looking for more simplification to play lines, I'd try to pick the classic components of a bebop line and incorporate the alterations and get away from the patterns and arps
Like the b6 to 5 and when going to l
Just trying to grasp the real idea and advantage I'm not doubtingLast edited by vhollund; 05-22-2015 at 07:14 AM.
-
Hm ...on ATTYA
Yes you can play Fm all the way to Ab, but I don't think it says much about how we place the notes that matters
Like if we played the song really fast it would sound like 6251
How then would we play the simplest lines while still outlining the harmony
If going for F minor
We could say Fminor with alterations maybe ?
Like :
Gb9 Fm
FmMaj7 (harm) on Bbm
Ab on Eb
Eb on Ab
Everything is Ab major scale variations
What is the idea of thinking lV or ii as T if it doesn't change the sound into something new ?
Like if you go blues it really changes the sound so theres a clear purpose of playing blues / dorian / l7 stuff on a 6521
If playing everything to lV i would think the idea is to create some kind of modal lydian tension (?)
Or am i missing the point ?
Bensons solo
Seems he is playing bebob line that clearly outlines the harmony and targets the tonalities
with a certain amount of backcycling and even outlining added Vsubs
George Benson - All The Things You Are:
I'll read through it monday and see what i can find
From first listen there is a place where he goes "vanilla" by starting of Fm and kindof skipping ii V and playing more like l - lV lick from Ab instead
I don't know if it tells us something
George Benson - All The Things You Are - Jazz gui…:
Man that time !Last edited by vhollund; 05-22-2015 at 08:24 AM.
-
Well I'm only thinking two basic chords a key which I find easier. Thing is it sounds like the same thing right? Hopefully, it just sounds like music. In my head I'm just going Ab-Db and back. Originally Posted by vhollund
The Barry Harris scales for improvisation are basic scales with added notes as required to ensure that the chord tones come out on the beat. Hence the counting and the mistakes ;-)
The other Barry Harris scale (briefly alluded to) is the 8-note scale for harmony which in this case is major with a b6. The Eb13b9 and Dbm6/maj7 sounds going to Ab can be understood as a part of this. Other people prefer to use the Harmonic Major, which is obv. a seven note scale.
Re your 6251, not sure if I fully understand. I would break down that progression as
I --> IV --> some movement --> I
If the 6 is dominant, it becomes 'some movement.'
It sounds similar to what you do on the face of it. Like you say, perhaps you already think this way.Last edited by christianm77; 05-22-2015 at 09:00 AM.
-
Ok, see
Interesting
Thanks for clearing that up Christian
Well then no I don't think that way
I think of the altered 4s as voicings of V7s
And i only think of them as SD when they are so
I use 3 basic chords SD D T
I find that 6251s will mostly be played in two ways
All dominants or
Vl7 ii V7 l
This last one being the most diatonically transposable
The first one being the 'dirty' bluesy one
What you are doing, in my world, is exploring voicings subs and hybrids of those same chordsLast edited by vhollund; 05-22-2015 at 10:41 AM.
-
this whole album is just filled with amazing playing. terrible sound, but untouchable guitar work. this is from that same album: Originally Posted by vhollund
-
Originally Posted by JazzinNY
Thanks. Thats the same way I feel. A reductionists view of A leaves would be you can pretty much make all the changes with two scales.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
For one, Benson said he does, and many others he played with looked at it the same way. But the thing is, no matter how you play, it can be broken down this way. Its the way you hear most jazz tunes and music in general. Tension and release. Thats really all it is. There are in sounds that are strong and weak. And there are out sounds that are strong and weak. You hear guys improvising and it flows in and out, in and out. In rock songs, most tension is done with bending notes,repeated figures or other devices, because most things that are played are all "in" sounds. Those are used in jazz as well, but most tension is achieved by dominant sounds to my ear at least.
Reply With Quote
Blues clip from Saturday
Yesterday, 11:54 PM in From The Bandstand